Connect with us

Everything

GOP’s hidden contempt for limiting government is why they’re failing

Published

on

Ask an average Jane or Joe on the street which party is in favor of limiting government and most with a basic understanding of party politics will point to the Republicans. Shrinking government has been a mantra of the GOP since FDR’s New Deal, but in recent decades it’s been nothing more than that: a mantra.

In reality, the GOP has embraced big government at progressively stronger degrees since Barry Goldwater lost his election. They had Ronald Reagan do what he could to slow the growth, but the federal government grew even under his watch. It wasn’t all his fault; fighting the Establishment has always been a challenge for small-government Republicans, even the Gipper.

Today, we’re seeing the culmination of the GOP’s hidden contempt for limiting government manifest in its most blatant form: inaction.  Despite control of most states, Congress, and the White House, they’re tiptoeing the line between their mantra and their true feelings. This is most obviously seen in the debacle they’re trying to call an “Obamacare repeal.”

For seven years, they’ve railed against the notion of government-run health insurance. They’ve campaigned on the idea that if they had the opportunity, they would roll back the damaging policies of Obamacare. Now that they have the power, they’re impotent. Why? Because they don’t really want government to get out of health insurance. It’s too lucrative. It gives them too much power over wealth distribution. It enables them to do things they couldn’t do if the free market economy took the reins in the health care industry once again.

This is why they were able to pass a clean repeal in 2015. They knew it would get vetoed. Now that they have a President who allegedly wouldn’t veto a clean repeal, it’s only spoken of by actual Federalist-minded conservatives. The rest sit back and make excuses for why they won’t pass the bill they passed two years ago. These excuses are hollow, but more importantly they’re often flat-out lies.

The Republican Party is not a party that embraces limiting government. They are the party that will accept slightly less government than the Democrats. With their opponents now pushing further to the left, it should surprise nobody that the GOP is lurching to the left along with them. Why? Because they can. Because conservatives and Federalists feel they have no better option than to accept the lesser of two evils. This more than anything else is why the Federalist Party must rise. If the GOP will only pretend to want to limit government, a party that will truly act on the promise to defend the Constitution and reduce the influence of DC over states and individuals must become viable.

There are three areas that Federalists must attack in order to succeed: Congress, the Presidency, and the electorate itself. Let’s look at why all three need an infusion of Federalist-thinking for the betterment of the nation.

A Congress that won’t relinquish influence

The concept of “enumerated powers” has been lost on today’s variation of Congress. This isn’t new. It’s been growing since FDR opened the floodgates.

Getting people who are willing to relinquish influence and the benefits of wielding it is why the Federalist Party must always take the high road when selecting candidates and representatives. This means finding people who aren’t life-long politicians, who find no allure in favors or kickbacks, and who are essential incorruptible. We’re not so naive to believe anyone is perfect, but we can as a group watch carefully and hold our representatives accountable. We can also put in the right measures to monitor potential avenues where corruption can sneak in.

Congress is unwilling to give up an ounce of power once it has hold of it. We don’t believe every GOP Congressman and Senator has always been corrupted by the benefits of state-run health insurance, but now that they’re in the driver’s seat many of them have been convinced of the benefits. Why give up control over something so lucrative?

Unfortunately, their attachment to power is hurting America and her citizens. We need consumers to drive the health care markets which means that any form of mandate cannot be allowed. Once insurance companies know they’re offering commodities rather than mandated services, the consumer-driven market can drive down costs and improve quality. That’s how it works in other industries. The health insurance industry is no different.

These concepts aren’t lost on Congress, but embracing them requires a willingness to relinquish influence. Most will not. Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and others are willing to fight to get the national government out of health care which is why they’re Federalists even if they still retain the (R) next to their names on the ballot. Someday soon, this will change.

A President who’s concerned about himself

Politico, which I admittedly rarely read because of its left-leaning nature, put out a surprisingly strong piece about the GOP’s failings. They start off the article, “GOP despairs at inability to deliver,” with a very telling statement:

The Republican Party is more powerful than it’s been in more than a decade — and yet it has never seemed so weak.

What they missed in the article is that one of the biggest reasons for the GOP’s weakness is in the mentality of the President himself. It’s not that some of his policies are liberal because some of his other policies are conservative. It’s not that he’s too new or inexperienced. It isn’t even that he lacks the intelligence. The main reason the President is damaging the GOP is because he’s more interested in protecting and promoting himself than in leading the nation.

We’ve seen this narcissism in the White House before. In fact, the most narcissistic President in the modern era just left the Oval Office. With Trump, it’s slightly different. His narcissism and desire to protect himself are accentuated by his most unfortunate character flaw. When he feels threatened, he isn’t the fighter that he and his most vociferous supporters want to believe he is. Instead, he uses the weakest defense mechanism available to him: the victim card. Everyone’s unfair to him. Everyone treats him badly. He’s just a poor, defenseless President and the mean [fill in the blank] are being mean little meanies to him.

Yes, he’s that juvenile.

It’s unlikely the Federalist Party will be able to mount the support or fundraising necessary to put up a serious contender by 2020, but we’re certainly going to try. Our desire to never run in an election unless we have a chance of winning it will prevent us from going down the road of futility that the Libertarian, Constitution, and other third parties travel every four years. With that said, we will do what we can as long as we remain realistic.

An electorate that clings to slogans

I wish I could find the article with the exact poll numbers, but I’ll have to present some striking data from memory. Two years ago, over 70% of Republicans wanted free trade over fair trade. Around September or October of last year, the number was down to under 40%. Why? Because the electorate bought into a slogan.

Never in history has there been such easy access to real information. The Internet has empowered the people to be informed if they choose to be. Unfortunately, the masses are either clinging to “fake news” or ignoring news altogether.

It’s imperative that the electorate changes how it receives and perceives information in the coming years. It’s inexcusable that over 40% of GOP voters prior to voting for Trump believed that he was born into poverty, that he’s a self-made success.

We need to be the most educated electorate in the world, not one that falls for false slogans like “drain the swamp” or “yes we can.” We need an electorate who realizes that smaller government yields far superior results than constant government overreach.

We need the electorate to learn.

The tenets of small-government federalism can and should ring true for a majority of Americans. We’ve seen the results the Democrats delivered and we’re seeing similar results from big-government Republicans. This needs to change quickly. Federalism is the answer.

Christian, husband, father. EIC, NOQ Report. Co-Founder, the Federalist Party. Just a normal guy who will no longer sit around while the country heads in the wrong direction.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

21-year-old with Down Syndrome speaks out to the United Nations

Published

on

21-year-old with Down Syndrome speaks out to the United Nations

Charlotte Helene Fien loves golf. She’s been golfing since she was 6-years-old and would love a job with which she can teach children how to play. Just like so many young adults venturing forth into the world, she has ambitions, dreams, and goals. Some people don’t think she should have had the opportunity to pursue those things. Fein has Down Syndrome.

In response to a Tunisian attorney’s comments during a United Nations Human Rights Committee meeting, Fein has made a video. The lawyer reportedly claimed that abortion is a viable means to prevent a life-long “handicap” like Down Syndrome. As with most “tolerant” leftist arguments on the topic, he felt his superior sense of humanity dictated he needed to do whatever he could to prevent people like Fein from every leaving the womb and becoming part of his world.

Watch the video and share it with anyone who needs to be reminded that people are people regardless of how the United Nations wishes to classify their existence.

Source: Faithwire

‘I’m a Human Being Just Like You’: 21-Year-Old Woman With Down Syndrome Delivers Powerful Rebuke to the UN

http://www.faithwire.com/2017/11/24/im-a-human-being-just-like-you-21-year-old-woman-with-down-syndrome-delivers-powerful-rebuke-to-the-un/Fien responded with a powerful open letter hitting back at these statements and at people who believe that those like her should be “aborted up to birth.” In addition to proclaiming that she is “deeply offended” and feels attacked for who she is, she affirmed her humanity and asked that the attorney think deeper about his proclamations.

“I’m a human being just like you. Our only difference is an extra chromosome,” she wrote. “My extra chromosome makes me far more tolerant than you, sir.”

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Did Joe Arpaio target Jeff Flake’s son with animal cruelty charges?

Published

on

Did Joe Arpaio target Jeff Flakes son with animal cruelty charges

Joe Arpaio doesn’t shy away from controversy and isn’t averse to causing a little mayhem. The latest incident may be even bigger than just whether or not he did wrong as he’s considering running for a Senate seat. The source of his troubles: the son of the man he may hope to replace, Senator Jeff Flake.

In 2014, Arpaio’s Sheriff’s Department looked into Austin Flake’s and his wife’s involvement in the deaths of 21 dogs. It was in a kennel operated by his in-laws. The Flakes were watching the dogs while the proprietors of the kennel were out of town.

Their deaths were due to an air conditioning unit that failed in a small room where the dogs spent the nights. Based on this information, the case against the Flakes was dismissed.

The lawsuit they’ve filed against Arpaio says they were targeted for political reasons to embarrass the Senator. They were put under surveillance and every effort was made to prove they were to blame for the deaths. The lawsuit goes to trial December 5.

Further Reading

Joe Arpaio accused of charging Jeff Flake’s son with animal cruelty to embarrass Arizona senator

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/joe-arpaio-accused-of-charging-jeff-flakes-son-with-animal-cruelty-to-embarrass-arizona-senator/article/2641649Sen. Jeff Flake was a vocal opponent of Arpaio’s handling of immigration issues in Maricopa County, the couple’s legal team said.

Arpaio and Jeffrey Leonard, an attorney representing the county and the former sheriff, declined to comment to the AP on the matter.

The couple previously sought $4 million in a notice of claim document for the suit, according to the AP.

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

Saudi Crown Prince calls Iran’s leader “The new Hitler of the Middle East”

Published

on

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

 

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, 32, who is also their defense minister, dramatically escalated war tensions with Iran this last week in an interview with the New York Times. He called the Supreme Leader of Iran “the new Hitler of the Middle East.” The two countries have been edging towards military confrontation with an Iranian jet from Yemen attempting to bomb Saudi Arabia. It was shot down, but the tensions escalated precipitously afterward. It’s no secret that Saudi Arabia which is Sunni Muslim and the Shi’ite Muslims of Iran are bitter rivals militarily and politically.

The Prince is now suggesting that Iran’s alleged expansion under Ayatollah Ali Khamenei needs to be confronted and dealt with once and for all. He told the New York Times, “But we learned from Europe that appeasement doesn’t work. We don’t want the new Hitler in Iran to repeat what happened in Europe in the Middle East.” Iran slapped back immediately at the Prince, saying that he was discredited internationally by his “immature” behavior. “No one in the world and in the international arena gives credit to him because of his immature and weak-minded behavior and remarks,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi was quoted as saying.

Qasemi followed up that insult with a threat, “I strongly advise him to think and ponder upon the fate of the famous dictators of the region in the past few years now that he is thinking of considering their policies and behavior as a role model.” And the dance to war continues. Tensions rocketed earlier this month when Lebanon’s Saudi-allied Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned in a television broadcast from Riyadh, citing the influence of Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon and risks to his life. Hezbollah retaliated by calling the move an act of war that was orchestrated by the Saudis. The Saudis denied it. Hariri has since returned to Lebanon and suspended his resignation.

Amid a consolidation of power in Saudi Arabia, with a so-called crackdown on corruption, a purge of the Royal Family and Salman’s ascension to the throne, war is looming with Iran. The prince, who is expected to succeed his father, King Salman bin Abdulaziz, 81, compared Iran and Saudi Arabia’s power struggle in the region to those fighting for Europe in World War II. The Saudis have launched thousands of air strikes in a 2 1/2-year-old war in neighboring Yemen to defeat the Iranian-aligned Houthi movement that seized broad swaths of the country. Everyone knows the Iranians are behind it and are using the Houthis as a proxy in the war. Salman claims that Saudi Arabia is winning the war and 85 percent of Yemen’s territory is now controlled by their allies.

While this may or may not be the case, the Houthis control the major population centers in the country still. The Saudi-led military coalition waging war on them is receiving intelligence and refueling for its warplanes by the United States. Over 10,000 people have died in the fighting to date. The group launched a ballistic missile toward Riyadh’s main airport on Nov. 4th, which Saudi Arabia decried as an act of war by Tehran. Salman proclaimed in May that the kingdom would ensure that future struggles would be waged in Iran.

For his part, Khamenei has referred to the House of Saud as an “accursed tree, ” and Iranian officials have accused the kingdom of spreading terrorism, an accusation it denies. For the record, Iran is the largest sponsor of terror on the planet, but Saudi Arabia is guilty of terrorism as well. Iran is working with Russia to take over Syria. They also basically control Iraq. A stepped-up war involving Saudi Arabia would no doubt draw in the United States on the side of Saudi Arabia and Russia and China on the side of Iran. China is offering to help rebuild Syria. If you were looking for Armageddon, this would suffice nicely.

The New York Times refers to this as the Saudi Arabian Arab Spring. This one is led from the top down and is militarily explosive. It is also a cultural revolution and a reformation of Islam. The Crown Prince stated to the New York Times: “Do not write that we are ‘reinterpreting’ Islam—we are ‘restoring’ Islam to its origins—and our biggest tools are the Prophet’s practices and (daily life in—ed) Saudi Arabia before 1979.” Bin Salman stressed that in the time of the Prophet Muhammad, there were theaters, Jews and Christians in Saudi Arabia and that the country’s first judge was a woman. “So the Prophet was not a Muslim?” asked bin Salman, rhetorically. World War III or reformation… it will be a conflict that eventually involves all major powers in a geopolitical conflict.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.